Obama Still Has A Lot Of Explaining To Do

reply to post by beezzer


Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

The truth is you have NO right to them. None. Zip. Zilch. Nada.

Until you find some basis for that claim, stop making it.

Another lying birther... big surprise.

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by beezzer

 

There is NO law anywhere that backs up your claims, but hey, you've acknowledged you have no idea what law it is, you'll go have a look though, which proves you're lying.

How about, next time, before you claim things like, "people running for President give up their rights" you do the research FIRST...?

Tell you what, a better use of your energy would be fighting PROVEN lies, like what are in the OPs source.

Lies that ATS loves to spread around as well.

If anyone has something to hide it's people that refuse to discuss the lies they post and the lies they help propagate.

Since Obama refuses to cough up the transcripts, I'm free to speculate on the reason why.

I think it's rude and not very transparent.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Still

 

Such anger!

If you say so.
Such assumptions.

The most transparent administration in history won't even show college transcripts.

I know it bothers you but that does not mean anyone has to bow to your demands.

And the election process IS a hiring process.

When will you be interviewing him?
When will he be handing you original documents?
When do you get his SSN?
What does the application you have him fill out look like?

No, the election process is an election process.
You and macman just think you can change what things mean in your head and win arguments with your new fictions dont you? It seems to happen a lot with you both.

But keep up with the shrill tone.

Please do tell me how you hear a shrill tone on this message board from my posts. Seriously, explain this comment to me.

It's funny watching progs twist themselves like pretzels over Obama.

Not as funny as watching birthrs play "I am not a birther per say but I have a pile of lies and stupid demands and questions anyway"

Now that # is #ing hilarious!

reply to post by beezzer


Why not instead speculate on why the OP is spreading ACTUAL lies? Hmmmm?

If your so desperately interested in the truth about Obama why not bust some lies about Obama?

Because you're NOT interested in the truth. That's completely obvious.

You're lies and you hollow and shallow desire to see something so far removed from relevant is just underlining your bias.

If you wanna know what kind of President he'd be, open a history book, as he's already in them as President.

But I suppose his Freshman Chemistry grade is more valuable in your decision making process.

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by beezzer

 

There is NO law anywhere that backs up your claims, but hey, you've acknowledged you have no idea what law it is, you'll go have a look though, which proves you're lying.

If president Clinton was forced to confess wether or not he got a blowjob or not when asked then Obama better show us what schooling he has had when asked.



Wether there is a law for it or not does not matter. If as a president you are asked by the people where you went to school you better be smart enough to answer instead of refuse. If he is indeed allowed to refuse then people like you should stop kicking and crying like little toddlers because the man just made HIMSELF look suspicious and he HIMSELF makes people think about the question.


A really smart president would have just provided the evidence of what schools he attended. Unless of course he is not able to do so.

reply to post by Still


Since Obama refuses to be transparent about his college history, I am free to speculate as to the reasons why.

He won't get my vote.

And I'll make sure that other people are aware of his lack of transparency so they don't vote for him.

Maybe we can start a honesty in government movement.



Sounds like fun!

reply to post by Rafe_


This is such BS.

Clinton wasn't forced to admit anything, except by the media.

Come on, what are you 10?

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious
Obama won't disclose his past.

I think it's very relavent.

What's he hiding????

Is he an alien?
Is he gay?
Is he reptilian?
Is he a muslim?
Is he transgender?


Without the truth, I can only guess.

Originally posted by beezzer
reply to post by Still

 

Since Obama refuses to be transparent about his college history, I am free to speculate as to the reasons why.

Whoever said you are not free to speculate?

He won't get my vote.

No #? See, this is why you should really stop dancing with the birthers. None of them are going to vote for Obama no matter what he puts out but their number one delusion is that anyone any longer cares. Your minds are all made up already and the odds you would vote for any Democrat ever seem pretty damn slim given your post history. So...what?

And I'll make sure that other people are aware of his lack of transparency so they don't vote for him.

If you have to make people aware of a problem that is only a problem of perception, then you are basically creating it. You sound like a nutter just saying that.

Maybe we can start a honesty in government movement.

Sure. I bet the next Republican president will a good honest Christian. Probably white too so that will be a relief for some.

Sounds like fun!

Sounds like you are just trolling out of boredom this morning.

reply to post by beezzer


And yet you refuse to even acknowledge the lies spread by the birthers. And you yourself lie.

I think they'll need a different campaigner than you.

So far this thread is full of dishonest political propaganda spread by people that are interested in, "truth".

In other words, it's full of political propaganda.

People that spread propaganda are liars by definition.

Either acknowledge the lies you're helping spread or drop the charade that you're interested in transparency and truth.

Moment of truth here people (real truth). Will the birthers acknowledge the lies they're choosing to spread?

Let's see.

Originally posted by spoor

Originally posted by xuenchen
Well sorry to hear that.

yes, we know you are sorry Obama is the first black POTUS....

I fail to see where the black thing comes into play

The diplomas don't discriminate do they ?

I don't remember mentioning black anywhere

Obama is half white and half black if we believe his Mother is Ann Dunham.

Well this thread sure got active in a major way since that first page.

This really still comes down to one simple thing though and it isn't a birther issue. This is a character issue. It isn't about removing the man from office or saying he isn't legal to run the second time. A court has made this a moot point, whatever side someone was on before that. It's over. Kaput.

Now Obama is asking for the nation's votes for re-election. It's perfectly reasonable to ask for whatever might be of relevance from his official background. Official would be along the lines of transcripts, diplomas, published or publicly submitted writings in the past...etc. Privacy is a CROCK. A United States President sits at the helm of the most powerful (or dangerous...depending on who leads it) military currently in existence. I don't think a man in that job has squat for privacy rights on the official stuff...and he was a total fool (any one of them) to think there could be.



I wonder...... Would everyone have been as tolerant if Bush had been equally obstructive and quick to hire lawyers to block everything under the sun where it related to his very average academic history and national guard service? I seem to recall the light resistance he did raise at any point being met with almost deafening protest of how the public had the right to know.

Nice double standards.... Obama isn't answering to stay in office, he needs to be answering IF he wants our vote. If he doesn't? Fine.... Roll the dice and take the chances for how many people have at least a few of the same questions and just don't vocalize it to anyone. It should be interesting to see play out to the end in November.

Originally posted by captainnotsoobvious
reply to post by Rafe_

 

This is such BS.

Clinton wasn't forced to admit anything, except by the media.

Come on, what are you 10?

ehm yes he was.

the judge ordered a precise legal definition of the term "sexual relations"

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by reaxi0n


Attack the messenger. Classy. Another person "interested in the truth" shows up.

The right-wing political propaganda machine is churning out the brain-dead mush-heads.

reply to post by captainnotsoobvious


Lies can only be proven as lies if they are confronted by the truth.

Since Obama refuses to provide the truth, then the lies are not lies.

They are mere speculations.

Maybe he's a ninja!

Click here for more information.

Click here for more information.